 |
Today's Show » Ignorant or Liar
|
marnesdad 7 months, 3 weeks ago |
First of all, I'd bet Wilkow's weekly paycheck that he has never even read the NLRB complaint against Boeing. He, like most rightwingers talking about this, read a headline and drew the wrong conclusion. If Wilkow or any of his ilk had read the complaint, they would see that the NLRB's only charge is that Boeing is opening this plant in South Carolina to 'avoid union strikes' -- which allegedly violates the union contract they have in Washington State. Nobody disputes the fact that Boeing IS allowed to open a SECOND assembly plant for this particular product in South Carolina. Nobody disputes the fact that Boeing IS allowed to make business and logistical decisions that are in the best interests of Boeing. What they CANNOT do is PUBLICLY declare the reasoning behind this move as a means to 'avoid union strikes'. The court case involves the NLRB showing evidence of Boeing Execs public statements versus Boeing showing all the other good reasons why they are opening this second assembly plant in SC. Wilkow and others are either willfully misleading people with their rants on the NLRB or they are simply ignorant to what is actually going on. |
|---|---|
|
nav68 7 months, 3 weeks ago |
Correct. The problem is the law, and the NLRB. Robert Verbruggen wrote an excellent piece on this specific case as well as the history of the law and the NLRB in the Aug. 1, 2011 issue of National Review. His conclusion is that the NLRA is "a bad policy", It needs to be repealed entirely. Failing that, "Congress needs to restructure the law so that elected officials, not not a politically appointed and ever-changing board, make the important decisions about labor law-decisions that include how elections are run, what constitutes an "unfait labor practice," and whether companies may build new facilities wherever they want to." |
|
marnesdad 7 months, 3 weeks ago |
I agree. I don't think there should be a NLRB at all. The states should be managing these relationships. |
|
nav68 7 months, 3 weeks ago |
I think Wilkow's point has been that it's inherently wrong for the government to interfere with the business world in this fashion. I don't think that the NLRB is necessarily required to act in every case. They chose to act in this one, I believe, because it's to the Democrat's benefit to do so (i.e., maintain their relationship with unions). The Republicans have made hay with this setup as well. Verbruggen points out that President Bush recess-appointed 7 of his 9 NLRB choices, and they tended to be more employer/mamnagement oriented. The process needs to be something hashed out between employers/employees, union/non-union. I'd like to see oversighjt by the state, but no "tweaking" the process for political gain. |
|
marnesdad 7 months, 3 weeks ago |
I think his point is like all his points... sometimes they make sense, but he's so God-awful bad at research that he just makes stuff up in order to prop up the arguments he's apparently too lazy to study. As for this particular case, the NLRB stepped in because the execs at Boeing made it a point to publicly declare the reasoning behind the placement of the second unit in SC. They pretty much forced the hand of the NLRB by not being smart enough to shut up... |
|
nav68 7 months, 3 weeks ago |
You'd think they'd have learned by now. Keep thy mouth shut. Let not thy right hand know what thy left hand is doing. |
|
marnesdad 7 months, 3 weeks ago |
The NLRB complaint specifically states that Boeing is NOT prohibited from making non-discriminatory decisions as to where work will be performed, including non-discriminatory decisions with respect to work performed in South Carolina... basically, the NRLB is saying that Boeing DOES have the right to open a second line in South Carolina, they just weren't allowed to say that they were punishing the union for past strikes, or that they were opening up in SC to avoid future labor strikes. |
|
marnesdad 7 months, 3 weeks ago |
...you're exactly right. They're in this mess because they didn't shut up. |
Post a Reply
Please login to post a reply.